►
Description
San Bruno City Council Meeting May 11, 2010 10d. Red Light Enforcement Program
B
Good
evening,
honorable
mayor
members
of
the
council,
previously
you've
directed
staff
to
review
photo
enforcement
as
a
method
to
improve
traffic
safety
in
San,
Bruno
staff
conducted
a
request
for
proposal
process
and
selected
a
photo
enforcement
vendor,
which
was
red,
flicks
redflex,
went
out
and
did
a
preliminary
evaluation
as
similar
major
intersections
and
at
that
time,
Redflex
advised
at
only
one
intersection.
Sneath
lane
and
el
camino
rial
showed
a
viability
and
a
moderate
number
by
violations.
B
Redflex
also
cautioned
that
over
ninety
percent
of
the
recorded
offenses
were
right
turn
violations
that
may
not
be
prosecutable
depending
on
speed,
vehicle
position
and
roadway
configuration
Redflex
advise
the
results
were
a
preliminary
sample
and
that
duke
and
conduct
additional
surveys.
They
would
require
us
to
enter
into
a
contract.
In
june,
2009
city
council
held
a
public
hearing
on
the
topic
of
red
light,
photo
enforcement
and
directed
staff
to
negotiate
a
contract
with
red
flecks
in
order
to
further
examine
the
volume
and
frequency
of
violations
at
intersections
in
San
Bruno,
the
contract
agreement
was
reached.
B
An
in
January
staff
work
with
red
flecks
to
conduct
additional
survey,
work
at
five
major
major
intersections
in
San
Bruno.
The
results
of
those
additional
survey
work
were
received
in
March
of
this
year.
Redflex
advise
out
of
the
five
intersection
surveyed
only
one
intersection
which
was
northbound
lo
camino,
a
380
showed
viability
based
on
a
marginal
number
of
violations
where
red
light
photo
enforcement
would
reduce
violations.
B
Redflex
added
that
because
of
the
right
turn
violations
and
the
configuration
of
the
intersection
making
it
difficult
to
install
the
photo
enforcement
whitman,
they
did
not
feel
this
was
a
viable
intersection.
At
the
conclusion
of
the
recent
survey
work
from
redflex
Redflex
advices,
the
city
may
not
be
able
to
recoup
the
operating
costs
from
fines
received
from
violations,
and
they
recommended
that
the
city
defer
installing
any
photo
enforcement
equipment.
B
At
this
time,
staff
consulted
with
several
local
jurisdictions
and
learned
that
both
San
Carlos
and
burlingame
had
met
out-of-pocket
expenses
up
to
three
thousand
dollars
per
month.
One
finds
from
violations
did
not
cover
their
operating
expenses
for
photo
enforcement
equipment
for
the
contract,
with
redflex
monthly
photo
enforcement.
Rental
costs
are
fifty
five
hundred
dollars
per
month
and
remember,
that's
one.
Camera
/
one
approach
at
an
intersection
and
we
estimated
management
of
the
photo
enforcement
program
at
about
two
thousand
dollars
a
month
based
on
the
preliminary
low
number
of
violations
provided
by
redflex.
B
Fines
for
violations
may
not
be
able
to
cover
our
operating
costs.
If
this
is
anything
like
our
neighbors,
we
could
face
potentially
twenty
five
hundred
dollars
per
month
and
over
a
three-year
contract
that
would
result
in
the
nesa
mated
90
thousand
dollar
expense
that
was
not
budgeted
for
staff
has
concluded
its
review
of
photo
enforcement
at
our
major
intersections,
and
at
this
point
in
time
we
were
recommending
that
we
defer
any
installation
of
photo
enforcement
equipment,
and
that
concludes
my
presentation
and
I'd
be
more
than
happy
to
answer
any
questions
you
may
have
back
tier.
C
C
B
Councilmember
cells
are
I,
think
you're,
absolutely
right
and,
and
this
whole
idea
photo
enforcement
is
looked
at
with
the
idea
of
safety
in
mind.
When
we
look
at
intersections
and
we
first
looked
at
this
program,
there
were
collisions
at
these
intersections
I.
Don't
know
that
the
number
of
those
collisions
were
significant,
but
certainly
safety
is
in
mind,
you're,
looking
at
an
expense
of
what
could
possibly
be
ninety
thousand
dollars
over
a
three-year
period
and
I.
Don't
know
that.
C
It
does
seem
that,
ideally,
if
you
put
up
a
camera,
it
will
somehow,
even
just
by
its
presence,
reduce
the
number
of
accidents.
So
even
if
you,
if
you
was
financially
viable
in
the
beginning,
you
put
the
camera,
people
know,
there's
a
camera,
they
don't
run
it
anymore.
You
don't
issue
any
tickets,
so
over
time,
I
imagine
paper
that
revenue
stream
would
go
away
anyway.
B
You're
exactly
correct,
that's
that's
the
idea
of
the
program
and
that
you
see
on
the
initial
installation
of
the
photo
enforcement
equipment.
You
see
a
high
number
of
violations,
those
number
of
violations
depending
on,
if
it's
it's
transient
traffic
or
residents
traffic.
If
it's
local
resident
traffic,
you
see
that
number
of
violations
start
to
decline
over
time
and
then
level
out
and
and
how
some
jurisdictions
have
chose
to
handle.
That
is,
they
move
the
camera
to
another
intersection.
D
E
Where
I
think
we're
all
well
aware
of
what
we're
where
the
major
cameras
are
in
our
communities,
you
know
in
our
neighboring
communities
and
how,
before
those
cameras,
went
up,
you
know
what
what
the
violations
were.
Like
I
mean
there
was
almost
gridlock,
because
people
were
running
red
lights
now,
there's
no!
Now
you
see
flashbulbs
going
all
the
time
so.
C
A
D
A
C
B
Know
at
this
time
we
have
one
officer
devoted
solely
to
traffic.
Our
officers
are
in
scientific
role,
are
handling
call
and
if
they
have
any
available
free
time,
they
are
monitoring.
Citizen
come
complaint
of
areas
where
there's
traffic
violations
and
have
minimal
time
to
spend
at
all
of
our
intersections.
B
Our
collision
rates
have
been
lower
over
the
few
past
few
years.
The
commander's
advising
me
that
at
El,
Camino
and
380
he
did
a
recent
examination
of
that
intersection
and
there
were
no
reported
accidents
within
the
last
year.
I
would
want
to
go
back
and
revisit
our
statistics
just
to
make
sure
of
that
fact,
but
there
there
is
a
a
cost
associated
with
that
photo.
Enforcement
I
used
the
ninety
thousand
dollar
figure,
but
keep
in
mind
it's
fifty
five
hundred
dollar
per
camera
per
month
and
another
two
thousand
dollars
estimated
in
operation
for
that
system.
B
D
B
Think
I
think
that
photo
enforcement
of
any
violation
is
a
positive
safety
area
that
will
improve
traffic
safety,
I
think
the
number
of
potential
and
what
you
want
to
do.
If
you
reduce
the
number
of
violations,
you
and
theory
reduce
the
number
of
collisions,
I
think
our
collision
history.
While
there
are
some
collisions
at
these
locations,
I,
don't
know
that
they're
significant
enough
to
warrant
that
expense
and
if
we
had
a
high
number
of
collisions
at
a
particular
intersection
and
I
couldn't
enforce
it
with
our
officers,
because
they're
out
handling
other
calls
for
service.
B
C
E
C
I
think
I
agree
with
the
council
member
of
barra
saying
because,
based
on
just
the
history
at
these
intersections,
it
doesn't
sound
like
there
is
a
big
public
safety
concern,
given
that
the
state
might
take
a
different
opinion
on
how
these
things
are
used.
We
should
probably
look
at
look
at
some
other
technologies
that
maybe
might
be
more
beneficial,
invited.